2. Respondent No.2 is present. She is being represented by her
counsel. She is duly identified by the IO SI Sanjiv Rai.

3. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court
under Article 226 227 of the Constitution of India read with
Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short
‘Cr.P.C.’) for quashing of the FIR bearing No. 128/2015,
registered against them on 03.12.2015 with Police Station
Crime (Women) Cell, Nanak Pura, (Special Police Unit for
Women Children Delhi District), Delhi under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC on the complaint of respondent No.2.

W.P. (Crl.) 1126/2017 Page 1 of 4

4. Petitioner No. 2 and 3 are the parents of petitioner no.1,
petitioner no.4 is the sister of petitioner no.1, petitioner no. 5 is
the wife of petitioner no. 4 and petitioner no. 6 and 7 are the
brothers of petitioner no. 1.

5. The marriage of the petitioner No.1 with the respondent no. 2
was solemnized on 21.06.1995 as per Hindu rites and
ceremonies at Jhansi. Out of this wedlock, one male child
namely Master Kartikay Singh was born on 19.04.1996.

6. After solemnization of marriage, the couple started living at the
matrimonial home. Due to some temperamental differences
between the petitioner No.1 and the respondent no.2, they could
not reconcile with each other. Resultantly, the respondent no.2
left the matrimonial home on 17.05.2007 and started living with
her parents.

7. Respondent No.2 filed a petition for maintenance u/s 125 of
Cr.P.C against the petitioner No.1 in the court of learned
Principal Judge, Family Courts, West District, Tis Hazari,
Delhi. She lodged a complaint with CAW Cell which
culminated into the said FIR. The petitioner no. 1 had preferred
a petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for
divorce before Family Court, Jhansi, UP, which was transferred
to the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Tis
Hazari, Delhi by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

8. In the proceedings under Section 125 of Cr.PC, the parties had
amicably settled and resolved all their disputes before the
learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Delhi on 30.05.2016.

W.P. (Crl.) 1126/2017 Page 2 of 4

By this settlement, the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 2
had decided to part company of each other and obtain a decree
of divorce by mutual consent. The petitioner no.1 had agreed to
pay a total sum of Rs.25,00,000/- to the respondent no. 2 in full
and final settlement of all her claims including the maintenance
for herself and for her son and cost of her dowry/stridhan
articles. The respondent no. 2 had also agreed to withdraw her
petition filed under 125 of Cr.PC from the concerned court.
The petitioner No.1 had agreed to withdraw his petition for
divorce.

9. The respondent No.2 states that she had voluntarily resolved all
disputes with the petitioners without any coercion or force.

10. Pursuant to this settlement, the respondent no. 2 submits that
she had withdrawn her petition filed under Section 125 of Cr.PC
from the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, West
District, Delhi. Petitioner No.1 states that he had withdrawn his
petition for divorce. At the time of recording the statements of
the parties in the first motion petition, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-
was paid by the petitioner no. 1 to the respondent no. 2. At the
time of recording of the statements of the parties in the second
motion petition, a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- was further paid by the
petitioner no. 1 to the respondent no. 2 by way of two demand
drafts (Rs.5,00,000/- in the name of respondent no.2 and
Rs.5,00,000/- in the name of Master Kartikay). A decree of
divorce by mutual consent was granted on 16.01.2017 by the
court of learned Principal Judge, Family Courts, West District,

W.P. (Crl.) 1126/2017 Page 3 of 4
Tis Hazari, Delhi by which the marriage between the petitioner
no. 1 and the respondent no.2 was dissolved.

11. Today, the petitioner No.1 has paid the balance settlement
amount of Rs.10,00,000/- vide two Demand Drafts No. 740165
740168, both dated 23.08.2017 issued by State Bank of India,
Sadar Bazar Branch, Delhi in favour of Master Kartikeya Singh,
to respondent No.2, which she has accepted. The respondent
no. 2 submits that she has received the entire settlement amount
from the petitioner No.1. She submits that she does not want to
pursue the said FIR. She submits that the said FIR may be
quashed.

12. Learned ASC through the IO submits that the charge sheet has
so far not been filed.

13. Both the parties submit that now nothing is due and recoverable
by them against each other. The matter had been amicably
settled between the parties and no fruitful purpose would be
served in further pursuing the said FIR. Hence, to secure ends
of justice, the FIR bearing No. 128/2015, registered on
03.12.2015 with Police Station Crime (Women) Cell, Nanak
Pura, (Special Police Unit for Women Children Delhi
District), Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and
proceedings arising out of the said FIR are hereby quashed.